Five minutes of research shows that this isn't true and that he knew.
I'm not sure anyone is seriously attributing the conspiracy theory to him, they are attributing to him that he spread it, publicly attacking the families while making money doing so.
he most likely works for CTR or some other PAC. am i supposed to believe some guy armed with pages of copy-pasted rhetoric and research is just some random schmoe perusing unrelated threads on HN?
It's absolutely his own doing though. He targeted Hillary in the 2016 election and supported Trump. Then told everyone the DNC leak came from Seth Rich. He is absolutely not a good person or an ethical journalist regardless of whether or not he's guilty of any crimes.
I just find it interesting you don't disclose your political party then all the sudden right before a big story comes out you say there's a smear campaign and it's political.
Also, sounds like there was a settlement. Not saying he's guilty but sure doesn't sounds like nothing happened either.
He's a publisher, not the original source, so he can't be a whistleblower (or leaker or whatever). And he seems to be a pompous ass, but let's be honest, people are mad at him because of the particular true things he published.
Collateral murder undermined the effort to sell war as a noble goal, and then Podesta's emails hurt the democrats, so now both political parties and their fans feel personally burned by him.
He's being railroaded right now, were you aware? Not a US citizen but somehow inexplicably being extradited and charged under the US espionage act.
It's not the first piece of disinformation he's spread, and it won't be the last. He claims that he fights disinformation to make his own spreading of it seem like a sincere mistake when he's caught out.
I think it's pretty safe to assume that he's the one benefitting the most from the lack of fact checking.
Not safe at all. (Covington Kids, for one thing.) The groupthink among the left-leaning media, particularly the news, is pretty egregious. The degree to which they communicate with each other using electronic networks and create their thought bubbles is well documented at this point. If you "follow the money," to figure out who benefits, then it turns out, it's Far Left activists who benefit by getting to push their agenda and set the narratives. This even results in monetary benefit through fundraising.
It's a rhetorical pose, for the benefit of mainstream journalists. He can't come out saying "AHA I KNEW IT!!" because he'd look like a conspiracy nutcase and be ostracized even more than he already is.
I’m sure he takes the appearances he can get after having all his sources of funding cut.
I hope you’re being paid well to call people propagandists who have devoted their lives and sacrificed everything to speak truth to power.
I don’t take it at face value and it does seem he has an understandable bias at this point.
The gray zone is super strange to read, but these are investigative journalists on the ground. Please point me to a source that has hard proof of ANY of this information being incorrect.
Labeling people propagandists and conspiracy theorists is a new form of censorship and it is terrifying.
- spreading conspiracy theories about the attack on Paul Pelosi
- spreading conspiracy theories about the Allen, TX shooter
I could go on. I do care about his character, because he's influential and because he's decided he's willing to tweet about whatever pops into his head, shaped by his biases and independent of confirmation or fact checking.
reply